Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

Eric Felack | Valley News Dispatch

Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

Eric Felack | Valley News Dispatch

Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

Eric Felack | Valley News Dispatch

Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

Eric Felack | Valley News Dispatch

Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

Eric Felack | Valley News Dispatch

Arnold double-murder suspect Robert Briestensky of Brackenridge, center, is led by, from left, Arnold police Officer Ryan Olszewski and Westmoreland County detectives Terry Kuhns and Paul Burkey for his arraignment at District Justice Frank Pallone's office in New Kensington on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

DNA evidence that could link another person to the murders of an Arnold mother and son could be barred from an upcoming trial, a Westmoreland County judge said Friday.

Common Pleas Court Judge Christopher Feliciani ruled the defense lawyers for Robert Briestensky have until 4 p.m. Monday to give prosecutors a report detailing an analysis completed of three key pieces of evidence collected in the Arnold home where police said Bonnie Broadwater, 46, and her son, Lance Holt, 24, were killed in October 2012.

After more than five years of delays because of legal wrangling and judicial reassignments caused by illness and the death of a judge, Briestensky finally is slated to go to trial next week. Jury selection is scheduled to begin Monday

The prosecution contends Briestensky, 44, of Brackenridge, Allegheny County, bludgeoned Broadwater and Holt with a baseball bat. According to court records, DNA found on the bat, a ball cap and a jacket belonged to the victims and to Briestensky, linking him to the killings.

The defense has challenged the DNA findings. Two years ago, it hired an expert to review the DNA found on those items.

That report has yet to be turned over the prosecution.

“There is no explanation for this. I just want to know if there is another shoe to drop or not,” District Attorney John Peck said.

Defense attorney Greg Cecchetti said the defense-hired DNA expert hasn’t given him a copy of the report, but he hopes to have it sometime next week. The witness tentatively is scheduled to testify during the trial.

Feliciani said Friday he won’t allow the defense expert to testify about any findings on the bat, cap and jacket unless the DNA report is turned over by the deadline. A prosecution expert is expected to testify that Briestensky’s DNA was found on those items.

During previous court hearings, the defense contended that fingerprints from a fourth person were found at the murder scene and suggested that another person may be responsible for the killings.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our
Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent
via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.